User talk:Newspaper guy 999

Unblock request[edit]

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): The evidence provided so far does not seem substantial enough to prove sockpuppetry. Awaiting results of this Request for CheckUser. Request handled by: Anthøny (talk) 20:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism warning[edit]

I am reiterating the vandalism warning I posted previously to your page. You will be reblocked if you vandalize Wikipedia again. -Nard 20:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fair enough. Newspaper guy 999 20:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions[edit]

Good Evening (GMT time); I'd like a word about your contributions, if you please. I'd ask that you refrain from removing CheckUser requests from WP:RFCU, as such actions are only to be undertaken by the CheckUsers, if at all; if you continue to carry out such actions, chances are you'll be blocked for vandalism, specifically disruption.

Therefore I'm asking you, in your best interests, to "turn over a new leaf", and contribute constructively to Wikipedia. The alternative, I'm sorry to say, is being locked out for good.

Kindest regards,
Anthøny (talk) 20:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fair enough, I will reply to your comments here. Newspaper guy 999 20:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would add to that that if you remove someone else's report with a misleading edit summary, pretending that you were reverting your own error, as you did here and here, I shall block again immediately. ElinorD (talk) 20:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did, I put about the names having no relation to molag bal, please check My contributions. Newspaper guy 999 20:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Elinor - if that happens again, I'll support a block ~ Anthøny (talk) 20:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it won't, fair enough. Newspaper guy 999 20:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm impressed by the way you're handling this, and I hope this is a sign of things to come! If you have any problems in the future, be sure to give me a shout. Cheers and best of luck ~ Anthøny (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

damn I am autoblocked! Newspaper guy 999 20:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I completely disagree with your unblock. It is quite out of the question that a genuine newcomer would start by removing sockpuppet reports, would find his way to the vandalism report noticeboard and would twice remove a report made by someone else, pretending with dishonest edit summaries that he was reverting his own mistake, and would know who Rlest was. And my block was endorsed by two administrators who declined unblocking. Nevertheless, since an administrator has unblocked you, I've undone the unblock. ElinorD (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of multiple accounts, as confirmed by this Request for CheckUser.

Kind regards,
Anthøny 20:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]